The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error 1) Since the Defendant passed a stop line pursuant to the left-hand turn signals, there is no fact that the Defendant violated the signal. 2) The victim’s injury is minor and does not require relief, so the Defendant does not have a duty to provide relief to the victim, and the Defendant has implemented all relief measures against the victim in accordance with the site conditions and circumstances of the instant accident.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of suspended sentence for four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined at the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of signal breach, the Defendant may fully recognize the entry into the instant intersection by violating the signal at the time of the instant accident, and thus, the Defendant and his defense counsel’s allegation of mistake in matters of law cannot be accepted.

1) The instant accident is a private-distance intersection where signal, etc. is installed and the Defendant vehicle left the left from the surface of the entrance of the license examination site to the left, and the victim’s Obane (hereinafter “victim’s Obane”).

(2) The signal system of the intersection of this case is in the order of 64 seconds and yellow 4 seconds of the two directions, both of which are the direct direction of the boundary of the new field. The signal system of the intersection of this case is in the order of 21 seconds, yellow 3 seconds, yellow 4 seconds and yellow 4 seconds of the two sides of the new field in the license examination site.

3) The victim since the police, up to the trial of the court below, stated that “the victim started to go through the instant accident where the victim and the Defendant were unaware of the fact-finding signals by reporting the fact-finding signals from the composition to the right-finding line immediately next to the end line, and the Defendant’s vehicle started to go through the Gap-do Bret, and started to go through the Gap-do Bret.”